db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel John Debrunner <...@debrunners.com>
Subject Re: in-memory
Date Tue, 11 Oct 2005 18:33:07 GMT
Francois Orsini wrote:

> *uh* ;)
> 
> Well I sure would not run a production application with relaxed
> durability turned on ;) *unless* 1) I can guarantee my system will never
> crash _or_ 2) my databases are completely read-only (not even sure we
> would not still see issues here with the log but this is just
> speculation assuming temp files used for large sort ops are not logged
> ), 3) _or_ tha t I would not care to rebuild my DBs in case of
> corruption, etc...

Well, I'm comparing to an in-memory database that will lose the data
once the system crashes! If the person is willing to use hsqldb at the
moment there obviously they have no concerns about or the need for data
integrity and durability.

> "Once the database is booted with derby.system.durability=test, there
> are no guarantees that the database is consistent."

That sentence is misleading, it only means after a re-boot. If you
create a database with derby.system.durability=test then while the JVM
is kept running there are no problems.

Dan.



Mime
View raw message